Automated Trading Championship 2007: common mistakes in experts - page 2
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
I get the impression that the result of 25% of success in the simplest test is a pattern.
Either the authors don't read the rules, or they are not their experts, or they live in their own world with their own rules...
You just need to put more emphasis on this clarification.
And in big, bold letters, write the specific steps and conditions of admission.
In such simple words that even a milkmaid can understand it, so to speak!
The 90/10 principle applies to all areas of life.
(90% of money in 10% of the population, 90% of intelligence in 10% of the population, etc.)
(But not always 10% of money belong to the smartest, but I agree to be a thief in the first instance and not to fall into the second category.
I do not like Diogenes' fate.
)
sorry i only just read about the test restriction
:-( 5 minutes for the run, it looks like I won't make it
using two calculations ... both quite heavy
If I manage to unload them, that's good.
but when trading on the real it does not interfere ...
I get the impression that the result of 25% success in the simplest test is a pattern.
Either the authors don't read the rules, or it's not their experts or they live in their own world according to their rules...
You just need to put more emphasis on this clarification.
And in big, bold letters, write the EXACT steps and conditions of admission.
In simple words, so it would be understandable even to a milkmaid, so to speak!
In this case, the problem can be solved by means of influence - autotests with hard results and reports. If you do not meet the requirements, you are ineligible.
Tomorrow new types of errors will be added and the conditions will become even tougher.
Why is an expert not allowed to participate in the Championship if he reaches Stop Out?
(This does not apply to me yet)
The Championship Organizer replied that the Expert Advisor remains in the game after the Stop Out, but with a smaller deposit.
Why not use the same principle for checking EAs?
So far, only ~25 per cent of the published experts have passed the automatic tests, while the rest have errors. This is a truly discouraging result.
200-300 participants and only 25% of them accepted, one month to go!
I mean, the number of participants is quite small...
I don't know if there are too few participants for such an event, Renat ... It's quite possible that the EAs are quite small.
it's quite possible that the experts
1) who wants to trade on the trend - i.e. have more than 3 open positions - example is the trend 2007
2 who use heavy calculations
are not so bad
we are all bad only when we have a stop out or just flat
Actually 25% is a good result. Programmers are almost the technical elite, so the percentage is higher among them. 90/10 is closer to the truth. From my observations it is more like 99/1. Just look around our rubbish dumps and it's obvious that no matter how boldly you write "Garbage dump is prohibited" it won't make any difference.
One just has to take into account that the Championship is for the "general public" so to speak and not for a select few pros.
Everything valuable comes into being through misunderstanding, neglect, ignorance, criticism, caprices, etc. and it is truly established (as everything in this world) only after a generation and not by logical proof (useless), but mysteriously, simply because the new generation in general accepts the status quo as the norm...
To the organisers' credit, they find the strength to withstand the onslaught. One can only wish them success!
Actually 25% is a good result. Programmers are almost the technical elite, so the percentage is higher among them. 90/10 is closer to the truth. From my observations it is more like 99/1. Just look around our rubbish dumps and it's obvious that no matter how boldly you write "Garbage dump is prohibited!
We just have to take into account that the Championship is for the general public, so to speak, and not for a select few pros.
Actually 25% is a good result. Programmers are almost the technical elite, so the percentage is higher among them. 90/10 is closer to the truth. From my observations it is more like 99/1. Just look around our rubbish dumps and it's obvious that no matter how boldly you write "Garbage dump is prohibited" it won't make any difference.
One just has to take into account that the Championship is for the "general public" so to speak and not for a select few pros.
Everything valuable comes into being through misunderstanding, neglect, ignorance, criticism, caprices, etc. and it is truly established (as everything in this world) only after a generation and not by logical proof (useless), but mysteriously, simply because the new generation in general accepts the status quo as the norm...
To the organisers' credit, they find the strength to withstand the onslaught. One can only wish them success!
Yes, 25% is not bad! On a ratio of 99/1
300 applicants were found for the world championship, of which the rules are the vast majority, and only 25% remain
and some may not pass the 5 minute barrier = more elimination, unfortunately said about five minutes a month before the start
but that's probably going to turn some people away...
Of course it's good that elimination happens, it's normal and natural!
There's no way it's going to be a mass participation... It's going to be a battle among a select group of experts..,
which is an effective principle that doesn't burden the CPU...
(it would be nice if - do not accept experts who simply leak on the plot 2007)
i would not do it!
- i would not use such an Expert Advisor, although i would give priority to BAY with a sufficient stop and the Expert Advisor would pass this test!
( on the other hand, it's the Expert Advisor I was using since the beginning of the year before the mortgage crisis )
- I had such an Expert Advisor in the last championship! The guy got up in August on MN1 W1 and just wrote a buy without a sit
i wanted to see and participate in the battle for profits! and not for the efficient use of resources.
it is enough that the dropout will occur due to errors like wrong stops and others
for sure a lot and 3 orders would not affect some strategies
As a guy wrote here that his run lasts more than 5 minutes - about 13 minutes, as Renat says!
It turns out the guy needs to pay attention not to profitability and trading indicators - but to save machine time!
If a trader spends an hour instead of 10 minutes on a morning or evening market analysis - and as a result he will make the right deal!
(Williams wrote somewhere that he spends 20 minutes to analyse the market)
Why should I need an Expert Advisor in the Championship that is flying like crazy in the Strategy Tester?
But the rules are the rules, and the principle can only be broken in favour of a reasonable racial!
Actually 25% is a good result. Programmers are almost the technical elite, so the percentage is higher among them. 90/10 is closer to the truth. From my observations it is more like 99/1. Just look around our rubbish dumps and it's obvious that no matter how boldly you write "Garbage dump is prohibited!
One should just take into account that the Championship is for the general public and not for a select few pros.
300 assessors at five 5-minute intervals = 25 hours rough assessment plus subroutine uploads
in a couple of days the machine can check everything
Why 300?
There were 1,200 registered.
I take back everything I said about the lottery championship!
In fact it takes brains to create and refine a strategy for the Championship.
I have just uploaded an Expert Advisor that opens 3 orders of 5 lots at a time, let's see the test results!
Q: Is the 5 minute limit correct for this EA?
By the way, the log-file of 100 megabytes confirms excessive consumption of resources. This is clearly stated in the rules and in the first post of this thread.
Can you tell me please, I don't know probably all the details of testing
maybe there is a nuance, that allows to test an Expert Advisor that uses indicators actively working with the chart without visualization
this means the creation of objects by the indicator and reading them by the Expert Advisor
the expert advisor works with the indicator which is applied to the chart and generates signals only in the visualization mode
the IsVisualMode command was not used
but in visualization mode, during testing, it exceeds 5 minutes - on my machine, 2 gigabytes + 3 mhz + hypertrading
if i do not rewrite the indicator - are there any ways of testing without visualization
do you test the EA in visualisation mode or without it ?
without visualization EA does not open deal
i had to give up indicator commands that create objects on the chart
that really slowed down ...
I unloaded some of the work of EA - removing one indicator, which is good but very heavy
which have an effective principle which does not load the CPU and gives a profit at the same time.